m2k - i agree that the car company's have not "put all the eggs in one basket" but it seems to me that some out there are viewing that way bc of the dollars spent. journalists at least are making it sound like the volt is THE product when really its just the start of something that will grow and grow in the marketplace. its definitely flawed and i wont drive one but I admit that cars like the Volt need to exist for progress to be made. im on your side to some degree but i completely disagree with you that it reduces emissions - as of now you have to burn coal to get the electricity and coal is a cheaper but less environmentally friendly fuel than gasoline and its less efficient to turn coal into electricity then charge that into a batter than it is to just burn gasoline in an ICE. electric cars are just one half of the answer, we also need to find clean and cheap ways to make that electricity - so far coal is just a cheap way.

April 3rd, 2012, 5:28 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10398Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

The Legend wrote:

m2k - i agree that the car company's have not "put all the eggs in one basket" but it seems to me that some out there are viewing that way bc of the dollars spent. journalists at least are making it sound like the volt is THE product when really its just the start of something that will grow and grow in the marketplace. its definitely flawed and i wont drive one but I admit that cars like the Volt need to exist for progress to be made. im on your side to some degree but i completely disagree with you that it reduces emissions - as of now you have to burn coal to get the electricity and coal is a cheaper but less environmentally friendly fuel than gasoline and its less efficient to turn coal into electricity then charge that into a batter than it is to just burn gasoline in an ICE. electric cars are just one half of the answer, we also need to find clean and cheap ways to make that electricity - so far coal is just a cheap way.

Here's the thing...about how much coal do you think needs to be burned to charge one Volt overnight? I don't think it has as big of an impact as what some "journalists" (or TV personalities..call them what you like) are reporting. If it has that big of an impact, then why is there a market for electric vehicles? Why say that the Leaf (not directing this comment at you) is a better option than the Volt? And now Toyota has come out with a plug in version of the Prius. So, they are doing that because a plug in version of a hybrid is WORSE?! Get real fella's.....Toyota, with all the bad press they've gotten as of late (something I warned would happen years ago, but nobody believed me about their quality cover ups) would not come out with a plug in hybrid that actually was worse for the environment than their already existing and successful 2 mode hybrid Prius.

And the Volt gets 37 mpg on average when the vehicle is running off gasoline. How many other vehicles out there get that level of mileage, that can seat four people and not make you feel like your squished into a sardine can? How many of those vehicles can allow you to drive without the gas engine turning on?

I know I sound like a GM homer...but the fact remains that WJB continues to rant using numbers derived from bogus articles written by people who have a political agenda behind them to report their lies and misdirections.

And in regards to WJB stating that Leno bashed the Volt....show me a link to the article. Because there are a number of articles where he praises the Volt. Look up the one that talks about he has put 11k miles on his car, and has yet to fill the gas tank.

Talk all you want WJB. Bash all you want. But your opinion is skewed by extreme levels of bias and misinformation gathered from dubious sources with an alternative agenda than just reporting the facts.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

April 4th, 2012, 1:07 pm

wjb21ndtown

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

m2karateman wrote:

The Legend wrote:

m2k - i agree that the car company's have not "put all the eggs in one basket" but it seems to me that some out there are viewing that way bc of the dollars spent. journalists at least are making it sound like the volt is THE product when really its just the start of something that will grow and grow in the marketplace. its definitely flawed and i wont drive one but I admit that cars like the Volt need to exist for progress to be made. im on your side to some degree but i completely disagree with you that it reduces emissions - as of now you have to burn coal to get the electricity and coal is a cheaper but less environmentally friendly fuel than gasoline and its less efficient to turn coal into electricity then charge that into a batter than it is to just burn gasoline in an ICE. electric cars are just one half of the answer, we also need to find clean and cheap ways to make that electricity - so far coal is just a cheap way.

Here's the thing...about how much coal do you think needs to be burned to charge one Volt overnight? I don't think it has as big of an impact as what some "journalists" (or TV personalities..call them what you like) are reporting. If it has that big of an impact, then why is there a market for electric vehicles? Why say that the Leaf (not directing this comment at you) is a better option than the Volt? And now Toyota has come out with a plug in version of the Prius. So, they are doing that because a plug in version of a hybrid is WORSE?! Get real fella's.....Toyota, with all the bad press they've gotten as of late (something I warned would happen years ago, but nobody believed me about their quality cover ups) would not come out with a plug in hybrid that actually was worse for the environment than their already existing and successful 2 mode hybrid Prius.

And the Volt gets 37 mpg on average when the vehicle is running off gasoline. How many other vehicles out there get that level of mileage, that can seat four people and not make you feel like your squished into a sardine can? How many of those vehicles can allow you to drive without the gas engine turning on?

I know I sound like a GM homer...but the fact remains that WJB continues to rant using numbers derived from bogus articles written by people who have a political agenda behind them to report their lies and misdirections.

And in regards to WJB stating that Leno bashed the Volt....show me a link to the article. Because there are a number of articles where he praises the Volt. Look up the one that talks about he has put 11k miles on his car, and has yet to fill the gas tank.

Talk all you want WJB. Bash all you want. But your opinion is skewed by extreme levels of bias and misinformation gathered from dubious sources with an alternative agenda than just reporting the facts.

M2, my "opinion" is only skewed by the general public's perception, the marketing campaign of, and the shortcomings of the car. Even based on the information that YOU provided to me, I can't stand the thing.

There ISN'T a market for electronic vehicles, outside the realm of saving money and charging your vehicle at home. IF you can drive something like the Lotus, which allegedly gets around 100 miles per charge, at pennies on the dollar THEN there's a market. Aside from that there is NO MARKET FOR ELECTRIC CARS, and that's evidenced by the fact that the Volt is simply flat out NOT SELLING. There is ONLY an ARTIFICIAL market for this POS based on an over-hyped advertising campaign and ridiculous tax credits. I would be willing to bet that IF Toyota puts out a plug-in Prius that it gets over double the longevity over the Volt and that it is MUCH more practical.

Further, the ONLY reason that we're persuing these stupid rectum cars is because of the "clean energy initiative" and the clamoring for wind power. Democrats REFUSE to look at REAL data regarding how much of our power supply can be generated through solar energy (which has it's own faults, namely, that photovoltaic cells are TOXIC and they DON'T KNOW HOW TO GET RID OF THEM ONCE THEY'RE NO LONGER OPERATIONAL), and they think that we're going to live in this magical world full of pink skies and unicorns and get our power for free and drive these happy pollutant-less chariots. Maybe 50 years from now, but the fact of the matter is, it's not going to happen any time soon, and what we're putting out there to accomplish that end right now is garbage.

April 4th, 2012, 1:25 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10398Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

wjb21ndtown wrote:

M2, my "opinion" is only skewed by the general public's perception, the marketing campaign of, and the shortcomings of the car. Even based on the information that YOU provided to me, I can't stand the thing.

So, your opinion of the cars technological capability is derived from the general public? You mean, the same general public who reads an article like the one that started this thread? The same general public that listens to the garbage and lies spewed out by a "reporter"/TV personality/douchebag liar like this guy and believes it to be true?

wjb21ndtown wrote:

There ISN'T a market for electronic vehicles, outside the realm of saving money and charging your vehicle at home.

I just love this statement. There isn't a market for this type of vehicle, except for saving money and charging your vehicle at home.

That IS the market for this vehicle. It may not be as large as you'd like, or I'd like. It certainly isn't as big as GM would like. But it IS out there.

wjb21ndtown wrote:

IF you can drive something like the Lotus, which allegedly gets around 100 miles per charge, at pennies on the dollar THEN there's a market.

What about those people who need to travel more than 100 miles? You would FORCE them to drive an ICE vehicle, even if they really would prefer a vehicle that can bridge the gap. Nice, very nice. And what about the charging for that Lotus? Doesn't that increase the emissions, as was alluded to in an earlier post? Doesn't that cause more coal to be used to produce the electricity and increase the emissions? That's bad for the Volt, but good for the Lotus?

wjb21ndtown wrote:

Aside from that there is NO MARKET FOR ELECTRIC CARS, and that's evidenced by the fact that the Volt is simply flat out NOT SELLING. There is ONLY an ARTIFICIAL market for this POS based on an over-hyped advertising campaign and ridiculous tax credits.

Hybrids are getting the tax credits, so I guess those fall under the same guidelines? There's no market for them, only an artificial one based on those tax credits? And if the Volt isn't selling, what's your beef with it? If it's NOT selling, than the tax credits aren't being issued, and therefore it is costing the American taxpayer very, very little as compared to what it costs you for those same tax credits on other vehicles. Once again, your venom spitting at the Volt makes absolutely no sense, other than your obvious bias against GM.

wjb21ndtown wrote:

I would be willing to bet that IF Toyota puts out a plug-in Prius that it gets over double the longevity over the Volt and that it is MUCH more practical.

And now the truth comes out....your hate for GM but ridiculous love for Toyota. The Prius does have a plug in version in existence. The commercials for it get played on You Tube, TV, and just about any other media source known to man.

wjb21ndtown wrote:

Further, the ONLY reason that we're persuing these stupid rectum cars is because of the "clean energy initiative" and the clamoring for wind power. Democrats REFUSE to look at REAL data regarding how much of our power supply can be generated through solar energy (which has it's own faults, namely, that photovoltaic cells are TOXIC and they DON'T KNOW HOW TO GET RID OF THEM ONCE THEY'RE NO LONGER OPERATIONAL), and they think that we're going to live in this magical world full of pink skies and unicorns and get our power for free and drive these happy pollutant-less chariots. Maybe 50 years from now, but the fact of the matter is, it's not going to happen any time soon, and what we're putting out there to accomplish that end right now is garbage.

Once again, you just point to the fact that because the technology hasn't reached what you consider to be your personal state of bliss, it's garbage. You don't go from AM radio to MP3 players without having some steps in between. You don't go from the slingshot to the rail gun without some steps in between. And based on the idea that in the future MP3 technology, or rail gun technology will be considered crude and archaic, we shouldnt' have people or companies researching and developing those. How dare the movie theatres be selling tickets to 3D movies, when everyone knows that movies will be projected hallographically in just a few years, right?

And before you start stomping your feet and shouting about government subsidies not being available for movie tickets, MP3 players or rail guns, let me point out that our government DID give all three technological areas financial assistance for the stepping stone technology that has led us here. They may not have provided money directly to consumers, but an MP3 player, a movie ticket and even a high powered rifle are minimal in their respective costs and investment as compared to a car. That, and just about every adult in the United States uses their car every day. The same cannot be said about a movie, a MP3 player, or a gun. Cars are a need to have item. And cars are also technology that have to be put into the hands of the public in order to properly evaluate the technology and further it. You want a car that gets as much range as an ICE vehicle, without burning gas. So do I and everyone else. But that doesn't happen without first putting the Prius, the Leaf AND the Volt on the road first.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

April 4th, 2012, 3:09 pm

wjb21ndtown

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

m2karateman wrote:

So, your opinion of the cars technological capability is derived from the general public? You mean, the same general public who reads an article like the one that started this thread? The same general public that listens to the garbage and lies spewed out by a "reporter"/TV personality/douchebag liar like this guy and believes it to be true?

The SAME general public that isn't buying this undefendable piece of poop.

m2karateman wrote:

I just love this statement. There isn't a market for this type of vehicle, except for saving money and charging your vehicle at home.

That IS the market for this vehicle. It may not be as large as you'd like, or I'd like. It certainly isn't as big as GM would like. But it IS out there.

There isn't a big enough market for a vehicle that "saves money" for the first "25 miles," which is ALL THE VOLT DOES. If there were a bigger market people would be buying them!

m2karateman wrote:

What about those people who need to travel more than 100 miles? You would FORCE them to drive an ICE vehicle, even if they really would prefer a vehicle that can bridge the gap. Nice, very nice. And what about the charging for that Lotus? Doesn't that increase the emissions, as was alluded to in an earlier post? Doesn't that cause more coal to be used to produce the electricity and increase the emissions? That's bad for the Volt, but good for the Lotus?

If you think the general public cares about emissions, you're fooling yourself. They care about their pocketbook first and foremost, which is why the Volt DOESN'T SELL. It doesn't make CENTS!

If they DO need a car that runs over 100 miles THEY SHOULDN'T BE BUYING A VOLT. It doesn't make sense. They would be better off with a non-plugin hybrid.

m2karateman wrote:

Hybrids are getting the tax credits, so I guess those fall under the same guidelines? There's no market for them, only an artificial one based on those tax credits? And if the Volt isn't selling, what's your beef with it? If it's NOT selling, than the tax credits aren't being issued, and therefore it is costing the American taxpayer very, very little as compared to what it costs you for those same tax credits on other vehicles. Once again, your venom spitting at the Volt makes absolutely no sense, other than your obvious bias against GM.

No, there IS a market for them, which is WHY THEY ARE SELLING, EVEN THOUGH TAX CREDITS HAVE EXPIRED ON MANY MODELS. It is a PROVEN, WORKABLE, tech, WITH A MARKET. My bias is against that piece of poop car, I love GM vehicles. If I have a bais against a car manufacturer it's Chrysler. I don't see why anyone buys their obviously inferior vehicles, other than the Challenger and 300C, and arguably the Ram.

m2karateman wrote:

And now the truth comes out....your hate for GM but ridiculous love for Toyota. The Prius does have a plug in version in existence. The commercials for it get played on You Tube, TV, and just about any other media source known to man.

No, I HATE the Volt and it's ridiculously small range. If the Volt went 100 miles before needing to run on its gas motor I would be more favorable to the car.

m2karateman wrote:

Once again, you just point to the fact that because the technology hasn't reached what you consider to be your personal state of bliss, it's garbage. You don't go from AM radio to MP3 players without having some steps in between. You don't go from the slingshot to the rail gun without some steps in between. And based on the idea that in the future MP3 technology, or rail gun technology will be considered crude and archaic, we shouldnt' have people or companies researching and developing those. How dare the movie theatres be selling tickets to 3D movies, when everyone knows that movies will be projected hallographically in just a few years, right?

No, I'm saying that because this tech doesn't do well for the average consumer it's garbage. There is quite literally ZERO market for this thing. People that don't drive more than 30 miles a day shouldn't be buying this thing, period, and people that don't drive at least 20 miles a day probably shouldn't be buying this thing either. What percentage of the population does that fit? Maybe 0.01%? And of that 0.01% how many can afford the Volt? 1/2? 1/3? 1/4? So the market for this garbage car is 0.0025% of the U.S. BRILLIANT!!!

M2, you act as if GM is right and the rest of the public that refuses to buy these garbage cars is wrong, which is ridiculous. They flat out don't work for most people, period.

April 4th, 2012, 3:53 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10398Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

If people choose not to buy the Volt, I have nothing against them. I don't own one. What I have a problem with is someone who spreads lies about the vehicle as if it is based on facts.

For instance, you keep yelping about the Volt having a 25 mile range. That's incorrect. That is the range under the most extreme conditions (city driving in traffic, all electrical equipment turned on, cold weather, etc.). Normal electric only range is 35 to 40 miles. That is the typical commute for about 80-85% of the population back and forth to work each day.

And tell me, where are you pulling that number from? Sounds familiar.......owe yeah, that idiot who wrote the article that started this entire thread. The same one who claims to be paying $1.16 per kWh when the rest of the country is averaging about $0.127 per kWh. Typically people will be charging the cars on off-peak hours, thereby reducing that number.

Oh yes, and it was YOU who claimed snopes wrote an article that continued to say the Volt was more expensive to operate per mile than a typical gas burning vehicle getting about 30 mpg. But you got that wrong, didn't you?

And that same knucklehead who wrote the article tried to pass off the ridiculous idea that if he had to drive over 270 miles in his Volt, it would take him an additional ten hours to make the trip due to recharging, rather than the five minutes it would take to refill the 9 gallon tank and continue on his merry freakin' way.

And whether you want to accept the fact or not, 100 mile range is not enough for many people. The Leaf gets that much range (on a good day) and people aren't exactly flocking out to buy it.

And as I said, why do you care? If the Volt isn't selling, it isn't costing you a freakin' dime. You act as if you're some kind of major stockholder with the company. You want to hate the Volt, fine. But at the very least, get your facts straight and quit fabricating or believing BS stories.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

April 4th, 2012, 6:51 pm

The Legend

HC – Jim Caldwell

Joined: February 11th, 2005, 3:01 pmPosts: 4699Location: WSU

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

Quote:

Here's the thing...about how much coal do you think needs to be burned to charge one Volt overnight? I don't think it has as big of an impact as what some "journalists" (or TV personalities..call them what you like) are reporting. If it has that big of an impact, then why is there a market for electric vehicles?

Im not sure how much coal needs to be burned but its a great and fundamental question. I ve been going on the assumption that coal is a dirtier fuel than gasoline relative to the amount of energy that each makes. There s also the added step of energy transfer to a battery. But thats just an assumption and now that I think about I dont know why I think that and I dont know of any facts that prove that. Why is there a market for electric cars? Well I think coal is a cheaper and more plentiful resource than petroleum/gasoline so that may be one reason. It may also have to do with the fact that whenever you talk about oil you are becoming dependent on other countries particularly the middle east and there may be political reasons to not be dependent on them. As we mentioned above Im not sure how much electric cars help or hurt the environment.

April 4th, 2012, 10:08 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10398Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

The Legend wrote:

Quote:

Here's the thing...about how much coal do you think needs to be burned to charge one Volt overnight? I don't think it has as big of an impact as what some "journalists" (or TV personalities..call them what you like) are reporting. If it has that big of an impact, then why is there a market for electric vehicles?

Im not sure how much coal needs to be burned but its a great and fundamental question. I ve been going on the assumption that coal is a dirtier fuel than gasoline relative to the amount of energy that each makes. There s also the added step of energy transfer to a battery. But thats just an assumption and now that I think about I dont know why I think that and I dont know of any facts that prove that. Why is there a market for electric cars? Well I think coal is a cheaper and more plentiful resource than petroleum/gasoline so that may be one reason. It may also have to do with the fact that whenever you talk about oil you are becoming dependent on other countries particularly the middle east and there may be political reasons to not be dependent on them. As we mentioned above Im not sure how much electric cars help or hurt the environment.

In truth, I don't have the answer to those questions either. What would be nice to know is what the effect of having like 10-15% of the households in America recharging an electric vehicle overnight on the environment versus having those same households using ICE cars driving around 35-40 miles round trip to work each day. And let's not forget something....whenever you are pumping fuel into your car, you are likewise using electricity to run the pump. There is also a loss of "energy" in the form of escaped fuel vapors into the atmosphere, as well as spillage out of the nozzle. Also to be taken into consideration is the fact that folks drive out of their way to go to a gas station, even a small amount, off the direct path of the road to home/work. In some cases, it might be more than just a small amount (feet) and could consist of a mile or more. Charging at home involves none of that waste.

I don't think the Volt, or any electric car or hybrid on the market right now is the answer. But that doesn't mean there isn't folks interested in going all in on that technology right now. Most of the people that are interested in Volts and don't end up purchasing them have said it was because of the cost of the vehicle, not that they didn't believe in the technology. I am a HUGE proponent of Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology as being the best next step. But I also understand that other alternatives have to be pursued, and that every one of them brings something new to the equation.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

April 4th, 2012, 11:05 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10398Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

Bloomberg wrote:

Electric Cars Cost $1,200 a Year Less to Run, Study Says

By Angela Greiling Keane Apr.17, 2012

Drivers of electric vehicles such as General Motors Co. (GM) (GM)’s Chevrolet Volt and Nissan Motor Co.’s Leaf may save as much as $1,200 a year on fuel compared with a new gasoline-powered compact, a scientists’ group found.

Assuming gasoline costs $3.50 a gallon, drivers who plug cars into electrical outlets would save $750 to $1,200 a year instead of buying gas for a new model that gets 27 miles (43 kilometers) a gallon when driving 11,000 miles a year, the Union of Concerned Scientists said in a study released yesterday.

The study didn’t attempt to compare total costs of ownership of electric and gasoline-powered vehicles, and didn’t determine how long an electric-vehicle owner would have to keep their car for the added cost to pay off.

“The cost of the electric vehicles today vary pretty widely based on the models that are out there,” Don Anair, the study’s author, said on a conference call with reporters. “It’s important for consumers to understand what the potential savings are on fuel costs, and that can help them make a decision about buying a vehicle.”

Ford Motor Co. (F) (F), maker of a Focus electric car already sold to fleets including those owned by Google Inc. (GOOG) (GOOG) and AT&T Inc. (T) (T), said last month the price will start at $39,995 before a $7,500 U.S. tax credit. That compares with the $16,500 base price for the gasoline-powered version.

A high-end Focus sells for about $27,000, or about $5,500 less than a plug-in version after the tax credit, Eddie Fernandez, a Ford spokesman, said in an e-mail.Mileage, Emissions Differences

The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration rates the fuel economy of the Focus SFE, a gasoline-powered model, at 33 mpg for city and highway driving. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency certified the electric Focus as offering the equivalent of 105 mpg.

Electric vehicles also are responsible for fewer emissions than gasoline models even when taking into consideration the output from coal-fired power plants and other generating sources, the scientists found. The environmental advantage varies by part of the country, they said.

Forty five percent of the U.S. population lives in regions where emissions related to a plug-in electric vehicle equate to those from a gasoline-powered car getting more than 50 miles a gallon, the scientists found. Those places include most of the Northeast U.S., most of California and all of the Northwest U.S.Cost Almost $30,000

Edmunds.com, an auto-researcher, predicts electric vehicles may reach only 7 percent of U.S. auto sales by 2017 even when consumers take rising gas prices into account.

The average U.S. gas price was $3.91 as of April 15, according to U.S. motorist group AAA. That’s a 19 percent increase for this year.

Passenger vehicles sold in the U.S. have been getting more fuel-efficient, with the average miles-per-gallon rating rising to 24.5 last month compared with 21.4 four years earlier, according to data compiled by Edmunds.com. Small cars as a percent of U.S. sales gained 3 percentage points to 23 percent, according to the data.

In that time, the average transaction price for an advanced-drive vehicle rose 6.5 percent to $29,493 from $27,693, according to the Santa Monica, California-based researcher.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

April 17th, 2012, 12:42 pm

wjb21ndtown

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

So, again, even with today's high gas prices, they're inefficient and not worth the investment. These are old numbers that Barak Obama already touted as a great accomplishment, despite the fact that they're not economically viable numbers. Again, it currently doesn't make sense to buy one of these things.

April 17th, 2012, 12:58 pm

njroar

QB Coach

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 amPosts: 3220

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

They save $1200 a year, while it costs $8-20k more, so 7-15 years to recoup the costs when most don't keep cars that long. I think the technology will eventually make them a viable option for all, right now they fit a niche market. Even Ford sold 17k electric Focus' last year(0.1% of entire car/truck market), and zero in february in march. A niche market doesn't make for great sustainability, so the only fear is that they'll require much more government investment for the projects to stay alive long enough for the technology to catch up.

April 17th, 2012, 1:20 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10398Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

wjb21ndtown wrote:

So, again, even with today's high gas prices, they're inefficient and not worth the investment. These are old numbers that Barak Obama already touted as a great accomplishment, despite the fact that they're not economically viable numbers. Again, it currently doesn't make sense to buy one of these things.

I never said that using an electric car, or hybrid, was going to be cheaper overall to drive than a standard ICE vehicle that got really good gas mileage. What I have maintained is that the technology is not "junk" as you refer to it, but rather it is a technology that was put on the market at the behest of the public. It may be a small portion of the public, but they are out there and they are interested in purchasing them. Just because that number of customers doesn't meet your expectations doesnt mean they don't exist. For many of those people, the added cost of the vehicle is insignificant as compared to them have a greener footprint.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

April 17th, 2012, 1:29 pm

wjb21ndtown

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

m2karateman wrote:

wjb21ndtown wrote:

So, again, even with today's high gas prices, they're inefficient and not worth the investment. These are old numbers that Barak Obama already touted as a great accomplishment, despite the fact that they're not economically viable numbers. Again, it currently doesn't make sense to buy one of these things.

I never said that using an electric car, or hybrid, was going to be cheaper overall to drive than a standard ICE vehicle that got really good gas mileage. What I have maintained is that the technology is not "junk" as you refer to it, but rather it is a technology that was put on the market at the behest of the public. It may be a small portion of the public, but they are out there and they are interested in purchasing them. Just because that number of customers doesn't meet your expectations doesnt mean they don't exist. For many of those people, the added cost of the vehicle is insignificant as compared to them have a greener footprint.

M2, my point is, if its not cheaper to operate, and it costs more than a traditional vehicle, it IS junk. That's the whole point. It shouldn't be out there, and it definitely shouldn't be touted as our "savior" and sold in the tens of thousands until it gets to that point.

Personally, I don't think the "public" asked for a more expensive car, that used more expensive fuel. I think the govt. is putting that idea in your head. The Democrats have an agenda, and it's to get us off of oil, even if it gets us ON a more expensive fuel. They're largely driving the "popularity" of this thing, and the ONLY reason we're selling ANY of these things is because of tax credits. If the "market" was dictating that the "people" wanted these things they would be selling absent a $7,500 tax credit. The fact that the govt. is kicking in a 1/4 of the tab, and people STILL aren't buying these things is testament that my analysis is correct on this issue.

April 25th, 2012, 12:09 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10398Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

wjb21ndtown wrote:

m2karateman wrote:

wjb21ndtown wrote:

So, again, even with today's high gas prices, they're inefficient and not worth the investment. These are old numbers that Barak Obama already touted as a great accomplishment, despite the fact that they're not economically viable numbers. Again, it currently doesn't make sense to buy one of these things.

I never said that using an electric car, or hybrid, was going to be cheaper overall to drive than a standard ICE vehicle that got really good gas mileage. What I have maintained is that the technology is not "junk" as you refer to it, but rather it is a technology that was put on the market at the behest of the public. It may be a small portion of the public, but they are out there and they are interested in purchasing them. Just because that number of customers doesn't meet your expectations doesnt mean they don't exist. For many of those people, the added cost of the vehicle is insignificant as compared to them have a greener footprint.

M2, my point is, if its not cheaper to operate, and it costs more than a traditional vehicle, it IS junk. That's the whole point. It shouldn't be out there, and it definitely shouldn't be touted as our "savior" and sold in the tens of thousands until it gets to that point.

Given that logic, every other vehicle other than the most fuel efficient vehicle should be scrapped, and nobody should have the option of buying anything else. Because, by your statement, anything else is junk...including your BMW. And please, show me where ONE TIME that GM touted the Volt as a "savior" of ANY kind. You still haven't shown me one damn thing...not Jay Leno ripping the Volt, not any place where GM stated that the Volt was a cheaper vehicles, not anything you are making statements about.

People have a choice. It's not being crammed down their throat, as someone said. It's a choice. And now that gas prices have gone up, so have the sales of the car.

wjb21ndtown wrote:

Personally, I don't think the "public" asked for a more expensive car, that used more expensive fuel. I think the govt. is putting that idea in your head. The Democrats have an agenda, and it's to get us off of oil, even if it gets us ON a more expensive fuel. They're largely driving the "popularity" of this thing, and the ONLY reason we're selling ANY of these things is because of tax credits. If the "market" was dictating that the "people" wanted these things they would be selling absent a $7,500 tax credit. The fact that the govt. is kicking in a 1/4 of the tab, and people STILL aren't buying these things is testament that my analysis is correct on this issue.

Wrong again. Remember when gas prices started to go past $3 a gallon a few years ago. On this very forum, there were multiple posters RIPPING on GM because they were building and selling trucks and SUVs. Again, somebody was claiming that GM was forcing the public to by gas guzzlers because GM wasn't offering high mileage minis, and didn't have a hybrid on the market. Once GM put a hybrid on the market, nobody bought them. Everybody who was somebody that bought a hybrid, bought a Prius. Now GM puts hybrids on the road, including large SUVs and trucks. To give folks a plug in alternative, they produce the Volt, so that people can have an electric car, without the range issues a leaf or Tesla has. Still not good enough.

Face it. You simply hate GM and will bash anything they put out there. You already bashed the Malibu, despite the fact that your girlfriend drives one and loves it. Must be one stupid girl, huh?

You also said in another post that "the big three generally puts out junk", but then went on to talk about how you don't feel that way. Which is it?

How about your initial post where you said you didn't know enough about the vehicle to judge it and that the author used "fuzzy math" and wanted the people who know to pick it apart? Then when I do, you use the same math that moron did who wrote the article, and you continue to try and say that it costs more per mile to run a Volt than a regular car that gets 30 mpg, but you won't accept that those "facts" are dead wrong. But when Snopes refutes that article, you right away claim that Snopes is full of BS. How very convenient. In that same post you said you wanted one of the engineers on this site to pick apart the figures and someone with real experience with the Volt to talk about it. When I do, you argue with me.

You claim in yet another post that the Volt was marketed as costing "pennies on the dollar" to operate versus a conventional vehicle. Still waiting for that proof too. You tend to make a bunch of claims you can't back up.

Then, when you are shown that the energy companies are offering a program to consumers with a Volt that they can charge their vehicle at home for forty buck a month, the conspircacy theorist in you comes out and claims the government behind it. Again, without a single shred of evidence.

Oh, and then we can talk about how the Volt is causing even more emissions than standard cars because of the coal that's used to create electricity. But studies have shown that the amount of coal needed to charge up a Volt is minimal compared to the emissions put out by a car in those 35 miles. And with a sealed fuel system, the Volt just sitting in your driveway permeates less emissions than a standard vehicle with a plastic tank. Hmmmm....And what about the areas with hydro power, or nuclear power? What kind of emissions are we talking for that?

You keep on talking about the car getting less mileage than a standard car, but it is rated as 37mpg when using fuel. That's worse than a Focus? I don't think so.

And by your definition that "nobody" is buying these, I guess the same can be said of any car that isn't sold in as high a number as the Volt. Lamborghinis, Ferraris, many of your BMWs, Audis. Bentleys....they must all be junk, because they don't sell in as high a number as the Volt.

Nice talking with you.....come back with some facts next time.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

April 25th, 2012, 4:13 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10398Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Cost To Drive a Volt

autoevolution wrote:

Chevy Volt Awarded Best Eco Car in UK

The Chevrolet Volt is already an appreciated eco-car around the world. With its range extender petrol engine and electric motor driving the wheels, it’s currently the best available compromise in the field. It may have already won a few awards all over the world, but that doesn’t mean it stops there.

The UK publication Diesel Car has recently awarded the Volt and its sister model, the Opel (Vauxhall) Ampera the coveted “Best Eco Car” prize. According to editor Ian Robertson, “Just once in a while, history is made with a new design of car. The Chevrolet Volt and its sister model, the Ampera, have opened up a world of new possibility for electric motoring, extending it to a far wider range of people than the distance limitations of a purely electric car allow.”

“This is the car that makes greener motoring much more widely accessible: an electric vehicle without the angst, an environmentally considerate car with range practicality. Praise be for the brave new world of range extenders – here at last is an EV that is so much more than mere city commuter. It’s a sure-fire winner,” Rovertson added.

With its already impressive series of awards won since its launch, the Volt has become the most highly awarded car in history, and the only car to have ever won the Car of the Year distinction on both sides of the Atlantic, by winning the US competition in 2011 and the European one in 2012.

Yep. That Volt, it's a real stinker of a car....

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.